Re: Versa trashes the GPL as well

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>> 
>> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
>> 
>> > RJack wrote:
>> > [...]
>> >> b) They'll tell the court that the doctrine of promissory estoppel 
>> >> applies.
>> >
>> > That's Versa's tenth defense.
>> >
>> > "TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
>> > (ESTOPPEL)
>> >
>> > On information and belief, Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs’ claims are
>> > barred by the doctrine of estoppel."
>> 
>> Yeah, that one is hilarious as well.  "Dear court, how could we assume
>> that we had license conditions to heed when making use of a license?
>> They promised we could use their software under GPL, that certainly must
>> be enough to stop them from asking us to heed it."
>
> "Asking us to heed it" is a contract claim, not copyright infringement
> claim you silly.
>
> By filing copyright infringement claim the licensor materially breaches
> his obligation/consideration (i.e. obligation not to sue for
> infringment) in a license agreement.

A licensor has an obligation not to sue for infringement when the
license terms are breached?

That's a funny world you are living in.

-- 
David Kastrup